SOPA has been shelved indefinitely.

[Romper]

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2012_01/putting_sopa_on_a_shelf034765.php

Misguided efforts to combat online privacy have been threatening to stifle innovation, suppress free speech, and even, in some cases, undermine national security. As of yesterday, though, there’s a lot less to worry about.

At issue are two related bills: the Senate’s Protect IP Act and the even more offensive Stop Online Piracy Act in the House, both of which are generated intense opposition from tech giants and First Amendment advocates. The first sign that the bills’ prospects were dwindling came Friday, when SOPA sponsors agreed to drop a key provision that would have required service providers to block access to international sites accused of piracy.

The legislation ran into an even more significant problem yesterday when the White House announced its opposition to the bills. Though the administration’s chief technology officials officials acknowledged the problem of online privacy, the White House statement presented a fairly detailed critique of the measures and concluded, “We will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet.” It added that any proposed legislation “must not tamper with the technical architecture of the Internet.”

Until now, the Obama administration had not taken a position on the issue. The response was published yesterday as part of the online “We The People” petition initiative launched by the White House last year.

Though the administration did issue a formal veto threat, the White House’s opposition signaled the end of these bills, at least in their current form.

A few hours later, Congress shelved SOPA, putting off action on the bill indefinitely.

House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said early Saturday morning that Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) promised him the House will not vote on the controversial Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) unless there is consensus on the bill.

“While I remain concerned about Senate action on the Protect IP Act, I am confident that flawed legislation will not be taken up by this House,” Issa said in a statement. “Majority Leader Cantor has assured me that we will continue to work to address outstanding concerns and work to build consensus prior to any anti-piracy legislation coming before the House for a vote.”

It’s possible that a related version of SOPA could come back at some point down the road — though probably not this year — but for now, the push against the bill has succeeded beautifully.

I had been saying that SOPA would never be signed. The direct veto threat has killed SOPA and PIPA will go away.

 

[Raesvelg]

I was largely unconcerned about this particular incarnation of a bill that is, to be brutally honest, almost inevitable.

The final version will be somewhat less intrusive, but I expect that someday it will happen. Probably just in time for it to be irrelevant ten years later.

 

[Kotsu]

http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/...s-gaining-momentum-wikipedia-to-join-blackout

They haven't voted on it yet, nor it's partner bill. It seems voting is getting delayed (as though the lazy fucks in congress are capable of doing anything on a proper schedule) so we'll have to wait for official news. However, with sites like Wikipedia backing and being against it I would say things are looking up on the proposed legislation of both these acts to get shut down.

 

[Alereth]

Anyone else kinda feel embarrassed to be American right now...

 

[Kotsu]

Never. A group of greedy fuckwads proposed that bill while most likely getting their pockets lined with incentive. However, that's still the minority. We're still the best damn country in the world. We excel in every facet of the game. Liberals may cry we need to give more to people like socialized healthcare and shit, but the fact of the matter is we give away more than we should already. We're not socialistic, we're not communistic. We're capitalist and democratic. You can build your own future here. This bill would have shit on a persons ability to do so through the internet, in my opinion, and thus would shit on all the values our country was founded on. Then again, that's kinda the whole basis of the Obama administration, isn't it? Pathetically enough, even with the piece of shit socialist at the helm, I still think our country is better than others.

 

[Raesvelg]

Ultimately, the intent of SOPA isn't inherently evil; protect IP holders from the chilling effects of piracy, and head off a problem that, using the same scale of slippery-slope arguments that opponents of SOPA adore so dearly, would lead to the total collapse of all facets of the entertainment industry.

It's just not a very well-written bill, too broad in scope and nebulous in some ways. Rest assured, however: it WILL be back, ideally in a less-intrusive form.

 

[Elemmire]

Been awhile since I've posted (I've actually been damn busy with work and school :\ and nothing really been going on here tbh), but I'm glad that this has been shelved, but that doesn't mean it's defeated. I imagine it will be with all the outcry about it. Imo, you wanna fight it for real? Contact and even boycott the corporations that are backing up the bill and buying off the politicians. Of course call the politicians too and vote their asses out if they do vote on it, but hit the money supporting it and you stop the bill.

Here's a website with lists of companies and politicians for and against it and more:

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3261/money

Boycott em.

And Kotsu, I really don't agree or country is capitalist, democratic, nor free anymore. It's corporatist and ya.. :\

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/287-124/9448-the-us-is-no-longer-the-land-of-the-free

 

[Pascal]

Ultimately, the intent of SOPA isn't inherently evil; protect IP holders from the chilling effects of piracy, and head off a problem that, using the same scale of slippery-slope arguments that opponents of SOPA adore so dearly, would lead to the total collapse of all facets of the entertainment industry.

It's just not a very well-written bill, too broad in scope and nebulous in some ways. Rest assured, however: it WILL be back, ideally in a less-intrusive form.

They will have to find another direction, not just water it down. You can’t target a site like The Pirate Bay without doing collateral damage since there is nothing technically different from it and any other user generated content site.

 

[Raesvelg]

It's a complicated issue, aye.

The industry is right when it says that piracy is a major problem, and frankly it's one that's only going to get worse as time goes on, and broadband internet become more ubiquitous, and as the average consumer becomes increasingly tech-savvy.

As I mentioned previously, the inverse slippery-slope argument to the "SOPA WILL DESTROY THE INTERNETS!" argument is a future where there simply are no more big-budget films, games, books, or any other variety of entertainment, simply because it's no longer sufficiently profitable. If you can throw up a server in a country that simply doesn't care about piracy (typically a country that produces very little in the way of IP), and you've got access to the majority of the market, and the majority of the market knows about it, then you're in a messy situation.

When Ubisoft comes right out and says "Yeah, we're not releasing games for PC, because thanks to piracy there's no money in it compared to consoles"... things are getting pretty bad. And they're only going to get worse unless steps are taken.

Now, on the other side of this argument, there is the valid concern that excessively aggressive enforcement, or worse extrajudicial enforcement (such as what was basically contained within SOPA), will have drastic effects the internet. SOPA/PIPA allow for enforcement means that are suboptimal, to say the least, and while they also have provisions to punish IP holders who invoke the law without good reason, it's difficult to say how effective those measures would be.

There will come a time, however, when the Internet as a whole is going to have to accept that "freedom" does not include the right to just take whatever they want. And fuck, yes, I'm as guilty of it as anyone. I can cloak it in rationales ("it's not even available in the United States" is the usual one), but it's still a bad thing.

 

[Morcheeba]

I like the sound of her proposal. Holding the Int'l Trade Commision respoincible for following through on possible infringers when copyright holders request an investigation sounds perfectly acceptable and logical course of action. It would give larger well known sites the opportunity to locate and take action against threats, whether it takes policing the site or what have you, they have the opportunity none-the-less. Security has worked to a degree with sites like Youtube, and possible reassessment by the sites could tighten things.

http://lofgren.house.gov/images/stories/sopa/sopa_draft_alternative_approach.pdf

Spoiler:

Fighting the Unauthorized Trade of Digital Goods
While Protecting Internet Security, Commerce and Speech
Draft framework for discussion, authored by: U.S. Senators Cantwell, Moran, Warner and Wyden and
U.S. Representatives Chaffetz, Campbell, Doggett, Eshoo, Issa, Lofgren, and Polis


BACKGROUND
While the Internet has been revolutionary when it comes to uniting communities, promoting ideas and creating boundless opportunities for innovation and commerce, the Internet has also created new avenues for foreign counterfeiters and others operating outside the United States to sell unauthorized goods on the American market. This is harmful to the legitimate rights holders operating and employing Americans here at home. Downloading a movie from a foreign-registered site, for example, is much like importing a good from a foreign company; however U.S. trade laws – put in place to oversee the flow of goods and services into the United States – have failed to keep up with the digital economy. A 21st Century trade policy will combat the import of infringing digital goods and counterfeit merchandise while ensuring the continued free flow of legitimate commerce and speech online.

We found that using trade laws to address the flow of infringing digital goods into the United States makes it possible to avoid many of the pitfalls that would arise from other legislative proposals currently being advanced to combat online infringement. Namely by putting the regulatory power in the hands of the International Trade Commission – versus a diversity of magistrate judges not versed in Internet and trade policy – will ensure a transparent process in which import policy is fairly and consistently applied and all interests are taken into account.

When infringement is addressed only from a narrow judicial perspective, important issues pertaining to cybersecurity and the promotion of online innovation, commerce and speech get neglected. By approaching digital good infringement as a matter of regulating international commerce, we are able to take all of these factors into account.

PROPOSAL
This proposal updates import laws to respond to the challenges posed by the digital economy, so that illegal digital imports and digitally-facilitated imports of counterfeit goods are deterred. This proposal would enable a U.S. rightsholder to petition the International Trade Commission (ITC) to launch an investigation into the imports in question. Congress established the independent International Trade Commission (ITC) as an arbiter of whether imports violate U.S. intellectual property rights and should or should not be allowed into the U.S. Under current law, rightsholders can petition the ITC to investigate whether certain imports violate U.S. trademarks and copyrights. The ITC is authorized to not only investigate these issues but to initiate actions to prevent the imports in question from entering
into the U.S.

Under our proposal, the ITC would be authorized to initiate an investigation at a rightsholder’s request and issue a cease-and-desist order against foreign websites that provide illegal digital imports and/ or facilitate the importation of counterfeit goods. In order to issue such an order, the ITC would need to find that the foreign website is “primarily” and “willfully” engaging in infringement of U.S. copyrights or willfully enabling imports of counterfeit merchandise. This standard comports with existing copyright and trademark law. An ITC cease-and-desist order would, under this proposal, compel financial transaction providers and Internet advertising
services to cease providing financial and advertising services to the foreign website. The procedures the ITC would use throughout an investigation under this proposal are similar to those the agency currently employs. The public would be notified of the investigation and respondents would have a right to be heard, as well other interested parties. Final ITC determinations could be appealed in U.S. court. Additionally, this proposal would enable the ITC to boost its capacity to carry out this proposal, to issue expedited cease-and-desist orders when the urgent need for speed is demonstrated, and to prescribe sanctions for those that may try to abuse their rights under this proposal. The proposal would empower the ITC to issue temporary and preliminary cease-and-desist orders, when immediate action is necessary to prevent imminent harm to rightsholders.

Finally, this plan provides appropriate immunity for those entities that are complying with the ITC orders, including financial transaction providers and Internet advertising services that voluntarily refuse to provide services to foreign websites that endanger public health by supplying illicit prescription drugs.
We intend to make public a draft of the legislative text of this proposal in order to enable the public to provide us with feedback and counsel before the proposal is formally introduced the House and the Senate.

Sites and companies alike are going to have to take steps to increase security eventually anyway, just with the way things are going. To ask that they invest and/or take necessary steps to better secure their sites from illegal activity whether by policing or establishing procedures etc.. all to avoid legal action is not an irrational requirement. It really isn't. Although I'm not equipped well enough to see flaws like many of you are, I tend to read this as a very plausible and efficient proposal.

 

[Alereth]

My question is, where do MP3 converters fit into this? You can search almost any song on youtube and rip the sound out of it into an MP3. Piracy? Illegal? Youtube's fault? Where does this fit?

 

[JP]

Megaupload.com went bye bye. The first of many?

My question is, where do MP3 converters fit into this? You can search almost any song on youtube and rip the sound out of it into an MP3. Piracy? Illegal? Youtube's fault? Where does this fit?

I feel like this is hard to answer honestly. I definitely wouldn't say it's Youtube's fault though. Maybe they could find a way so it's not so easy to strip audio from videos but people find a way around everything. I'm sure these acts (SOPA/PIPA) didn't even have the MP3 converters in mind when they were written. They are focused more on P2P sharing websites, i.e. ThePirateBay, Mediafire, Megaupload (R.I.P).

 

[Morcheeba]

My question is, where do MP3 converters fit into this? You can search almost any song on youtube and rip the sound out of it into an MP3. Piracy? Illegal? Youtube's fault? Where does this fit?

I didn't even know you could do that. Way to spread the word lol

 

[Dancingweapon]

I didn't even know you could do that. Way to spread the word lol

It's probably for the best that you didn't know how to do it. The audio quality is shit.

 

[Kotsu]

And Kotsu, I really don't agree or country is capitalist, democratic, nor free anymore. It's corporatist and ya.. :\

I know and have confirmed many years ago that you're liberal. Liberals and Socialists are like the same thing, right?

That comparison brought to you by the Capitalism -> Corporatist comparison.

This country, too many people abuse systems to get shit for free. I don't disagree with preventing the piracy of wares/goods/products/etc that are for retail sale by the manufacturer. Obviously, when you download that movie illegally you stole it. Don't be an ass and try to skate around it. However, I will not submit or yield my rights of privacy. I don't expect anything for free. Even my own liberty isn't free, I pay for it in taxes. I won't have that infringed upon. So figure out a proper way to stop thieves and I'll support that.

 

[Elemmire]

Elemmire - corporatism is capitalism gone wildly wrong.

Hmmm, I guess since it seems to have stemmed from it ya.

I know and have confirmed many years ago that you're liberal. Liberals and Socialists are like the same thing, right?

That comparison brought to you by the Capitalism -> Corporatist comparison.

This country, too many people abuse systems to get shit for free. I don't disagree with preventing the piracy of wares/goods/products/etc that are for retail sale by the manufacturer. Obviously, when you download that movie illegally you stole it. Don't be an ass and try to skate around it. However, I will not submit or yield my rights of privacy. I don't expect anything for free. Even my own liberty isn't free, I pay for it in taxes. I won't have that infringed upon. So figure out a proper way to stop thieves and I'll support that.

Hehe liberal. I have never downloaded anything illegally. The only thing I think I ever downloaded was something I couldn't find any official copy to buy a DVD or such of that I could watch. When I do find one, I do buy it Everything else is freeware or I paid for.

And this really is NOT about piracy. Is piracy a problem? Yes. Is it wrong? Yes. But is it really that big an impact on the businesses? No. You know what this is? This is the corporations pushing legislation so they can shut down real competition because the old business model is dying. Thanks to the internet a stronger new business model has arisen and the current corporations are afraid of that competition.

 

[Kotsu]

I just wanted to make sure you knew that comment of being liberal and the comment of people with illegal downloading are two separate comments; I wasn't saying liberals download illegally lol I mean, all people do. Political beliefs have no impact on that, though. At least I doubt they do.

I do not agree with your opinion that online piracy doesn't effect their businesses. I think it greatly effects their business. The less money you spend at stores/theater's, the less money enter's the economy. The less money gets taxed on purchases. The less you can sell advertising for TV show's because you watch it illegally via download/megavideo/etc. Trust me, there are larger impacts to the economy and businesses with the illegal downloading thing. I just stand with not sacrificing my liberties that I earn through paying my taxes.

I should point out that it is hypocritical of me to say this, to some extent. I have downloaded music illegally and all before. That was back in the day though, when I was much much younger, broke, and stupid. Not a justification, just saying I'm older, wiser, and more keen to follow the law now.

 

[Morcheeba]

Piracy has played a large enough part in harming businesses. Music stores... movie rentals... these were in serious danger before Netflix was cleared to stream here. Itunes did not put music stores out of business, p2p did. They were in trouble before Itunes was available.

I download illegally, and I do it A LOT. I have no issues admitting that, it's easily available, so I do. Saves me some trouble, it's alllll about convenience no? But my feelings will not be hurt when I can no longer get my media for free, trust me, we'll get used to it and it was never something we should have become accustomed to getting for free anyway. I always preferred buying a new cd, artwork all shiny and such, especially when I love the band/artist I'm buying. Essentially, I'd only rather d/l the singles from bands that luck out with a tune I may like. The whole science behind music ruined it for many music lovers, the 'hook' allowed craptastic bands to release a single that got everyones attention when the rest of their album blew. Anyway. that's really a different matter.

I support the base ideals behind sopa/pipa.

Congress will certainly try again, as they should. And it isn't necessarily lobbyists that are behind their reasoning so much as the fact that they are put in office to protect the well being of citizens and businesses alike. Lobbying plays it's part, of course, they've got that carrot dangling over their head, millions of dollars shoved down their throats reminding them they need to take action because, because... because... we paid you and we want to! But ultimately, steps need to be taken to further protect the interest in commerce, innovation, privacy and copyright infringement.

 

[Raesvelg]

Hehe liberal. I have never downloaded anything illegally. The only thing I think I ever downloaded was something I couldn't find any official copy to buy a DVD or such of that I could watch. When I do find one, I do buy it Everything else is freeware or I paid for.

Given your presence in some of the manga threads (Naruto, for example), I call bullshit on that. If you're reading chapters as they come out, then you're either living in Japan (and reading Japanese), or you're reading them online.

Which, holy shit, is piracy.

And this really is NOT about piracy. Is piracy a problem? Yes. Is it wrong? Yes. But is it really that big an impact on the businesses? No. You know what this is? This is the corporations pushing legislation so they can shut down real competition because the old business model is dying. Thanks to the internet a stronger new business model has arisen and the current corporations are afraid of that competition.

Of course it's about piracy.

Good lord.

The "stronger new business model" of the internet is piracy.

Streaming? The industries have already embraced that. Digital downloads? Ditto.

The only thing they haven't actively engaged in is giving their shit away for free.

Which is what people seem to think that they're entitled to. Take Thor, for example. According to Torrentfreak, in 2011, Thor was downloaded a little over 8 million times.

Just torrents, mind you.

Now, sure, not everyone would have watched the film in theaters, purchased the DVD, rented it from Redbox, or streamed it legitimately. But you can bet that quite a few of them probably would have, and that the studio missed out on something like 20-30% of the profits they could have made.

And there are people out there who will, with complete and utter honesty, say: "Well, they still made $300 million, so they should just accept their losses to piracy and not complain", to which I offer these people the opportunity to have me take 30% of their "excess" income, the stuff they're not using to cover living expenses and whatnot, because obviously they don't really need it.

And if you wanna get really disturbing, take the film Source Code, which only made about $90 million profit for the studio, largely because it was pretty cheap to make (for a Hollywood film). Because it was also torrented about 8 million times in 2011. Which means that the studio could have made, in theory, almost twice as much money off the film had piracy been more difficult.

The argument that the industry is just trying to fight the emergence of a new market is one that died with the birth of iTunes.

 

[JP]

I won't argue that piracy hurts business because I'm sure it does. But I don't believe SOPA/PIPA will help business much. As Cheeba said, I pirate stuff quite a bit myself. Not only because I'm poor but most likely it's stuff that I wasn't even going to buy in the first place. If I care that much about a product, then I will buy it.

Honestly, if the entertainment companies and the government weren't such dicks I'd actually feel bad for pirating.

It's like holding a mic up to the radio just to record songs.

I remember doing that for ringtones. But it's not that bad lmao.